Sentences with phrase «good discussion points»

Then, look at the job description and come up with a few good discussion points.

Good discussion points arise from the examples in here e.g. Chelsea only have 40,000 seats but a lot more demand... Exam question answering the «YOTEL» demand question with guidance on how to approach this.

With present day concerns surrounding nuclear power, earthquakes, EMP attacks and allowing nature to bring equilibrium to the earth, there are more than a few surprisingly good discussion points embedded in this monster romp.

The article is written by an athesist who has given extremely good discussion points on the whys and why nots of posting this bill board.

And, as David pointed out — that's a good discussion point.

However, it does bring up a good discussion point for any would - be investment.

Not exact matches

This agenda should reiterate the purpose of the meeting, as well as provide a clear set of discussion points or action items to tackle as a group.

The discussion devolved quickly and not in a way that helps you get the point that Verizon Hum can help you drive smarter and better.

A public letter that outlined seven discussion points to better facilitate these types of conversations was primarily authored by Vanguard chairman Bill McNabb, who is also the chairman of the CECP's Strategic Investor Initiative.

Focusing on important, long - range discussion points will be a better use of everyone's time.

And considering the impact of religion on society (good or bad) I would argue it is not a moot point for discussion period.

@Let Us Prey Very good, you actually had me switching off the discussion point.

I was pointed to this discussion by a well - meaning friend.

Surely much more thought and honest discussion between Christians is needed on this point, as well as a more realistic appraisal of the actual demonstrated methods of Jesus.

Point taken (Google «Wesleyan Quadrilateral» for some good discussions on how Scripture should be taken with other elements in establishing doctrine).

Unless the discussion in the preceding pages has entirely failed to make its point, it will be plain that what is being proposed in this book is (as I have said) a «de-mythologizing» of the inherited notions of «life after death», with their (to many of us) impossible assertions; and also the «re-mythologizing» — or better, the re-conceiving — of their implicit intention so that we may have a valid way of affirming the value and worth of human existence, its significance and importance for God, and its preservation in God as a reality which has affected the divine life and in God has acquired an enduring quality which nothing can take away.

There has been much discussion whether the sociologist of religion is right in viewing his material from a special point of view and handling it according to a special method, or whether he has a more or less well - circumscribed field which he can call his own.

@NL: Yes, that would be a good step, but I don't think we are at the point yet where people are ready to take on that discussion openly face - to - face.

In any event, the point of this chapter, intended to prepare the way for further discussion of what I have styled «another» (and I am convinced a better) theological approach, is simply to insist that we can only be loyal to our ancestors in the Christian tradition, but above all loyal to the chief stress in the faith which that tradition has conveyed to us, if and when and as we are ready to put stress on love's centrality — and to use that as our key to the whole theological enterprise.

This last point is suggested in a number of Peirce's discussions, particularly in his accounts of the function of the sciences (see, for instance, 1.191) as well as in his references to the goal of rational conduct which is the summum bonum (e.g., 5.4 - 5, 5.433).

The discussion of assisted nutrition and hydration in dementia is good too, though it's a bit of a shame that the expert came from the US (where tube feeding is prevalent) and did not come from the UK, where it is almost prohibited, and where there is a real fear that tube feeding may be a burdensome and inappropriate intervention to the point where people may be treated less than they should.

Our Road from Regensburg column later in this issue reports a prominent British Imam pointing out that the issue of infallibility, crucial for understanding Catholicism but anathema to the secular outlook outside and inside the Church, is an example of a good subject for discussion.

Mike i have been thinking hard on this subject i hope you do nt leave the forum as i think we will get into a good debate / discussion the Lord has shown me alot of insight into this subject that i hadnt even thought about until Jeremy proposed his point of view.The word say iron sharpens iron we need to understand what we believe not just walk away because we feel it is treading on our beliefs because they change as we learn and understand because we have believed something for a long time does nt make it right.Use this opportunity to grow to learn and to understand what the Lord is wanting us to know if we cant do this as brothers how are we supposed to do it with unbelievers.brentnz

well, after this post I'm not gonna continue this useless discussion under an archbishop Tutu video, but as our savvy friend Joseph here has pointed out, the NT was not meant to tell history and you are trying too hard to rewrite history.

This point is obviously of the greatest significance for this discussion and before going further it may be well to examine it more closely.

I think that you both are making some good points, although... @BG hasn't been back to respond much yet, I'd like to join in on the discussion if you wouldn't mind.

The point to being an atheist and involved in these discussions is that for better or worse much of the country votes with some religion involved in their views.

But back to the discussion, rationally, eugenics is good which is my entire point.

This would be done by virtue of the extraordinarily complex rhythms within human experience wherein the core of the person's own experience is made compatible with the rhythms of external things, with minimal distortion, and whereby semantic rhythms within the person's experience point out the external reference; Whitehead's discussion of symbolic reference is a good account of this.

The best discussion of this point in Christian apologetic writing is, in my view, to be found in C. S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man:

Quotations from the American Standard Version of the Revised Bible, copyrighted 1929, and the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyrighted 1946 and 1952, are used by permission of the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U. S. A. References to these versions are indicated in the footnotes by the initials A. S. V. and R. S. V. I have used these and also the King James Version, selecting in each instance the diction which seemed to me best to fit the point under discussion.

The title of this discussion points toward the need to clarify what we mean by the common good.

If someone points out to you that citing Wikipedia is not an adequate source for the discussion at hand you can always find a good undergraduate philosophy paper to cite instead.

The aticle and discussion lack facts, misleading, but has a good point.

And I have a selfish motive for at least a good number on this blog to read it: I'm eager for more discussion on a number of points that can only be engaged if you've read the book.

Decisions had to be made from time to time as to where or when services of the church would be held; the church needed to be told of the impending visit of an apostle, or of some prophet or teacher from abroad; a question has been raised as to the good faith of one of these visitors, and there must be some discussion of the point and a decision on it; a fellow Christian from another church is on a journey and needs hospitality; a member of the local congregation planning to visit a church abroad needs a letter of introduction to that church, which someone must be authorized to provide; a serious dispute about property rights or some other legal matter has arisen between two of the brothers and the church must name someone to help them settle the issue or must in some other way deal with it; a new local magistrate has begun to prosecute Christians for violating the law against unlicensed assembly, and consideration must be given to ways and means of meeting this crisis; charges have been brought against one of the members by another member, and these must be investigated and perhaps some disciplinary action taken; one of the members has died, and the church is called on for some special action in behalf of his family in the emergency; differences of opinion exist in the church on certain questions of morals or belief (such as marriage and divorce, or the resurrection), differences which local prophets and teachers are apparently unable to compose, and a letter must be written to the apostle — who will write this letter and what exactly will it say?

In a good number of internet discussions, you will find arguments about the use or non-use of EVOO in cooking that focus on the issue of smoke point.

To me, the best point in this discussion is made by Stewart Mandel: whether we like it or not, the current system is designed so that any talk of resumes is meant to determine who plays in the national title game.

That's the discussion so explain why Mcaffrey is better at this point.

You indiscriminately spewed hatred at Preds fans whether we were trying to make points and have discussion in good faith or not.

Personally I don't feel we are far away from having a team that is, in technical ability, ready to compete on all fronts, but Petit makes a very good point about the current striker situation at Arsenal and it's a topic of discussion that will not go away until we are satisfied.

The point of the article (which I clearly didn't do a good on) was to examine through discussion the kind of holding midfielder who would be ideal for Arsenal.

OK, so it's pretty vague and not quite the definitive set of regulations we were perhaps anticipating, but it gives everyone a good starting point for discussion.

I think this has been an excellent post and forum for the discussion of circumcision - with great respect and good points for both views.

Either way, it's a good entry point for a wide - ranging discussion of values and priorities in sport.

Your well - considered post does say this, my point is to push us further into our own process as I believe this (and the discussions unfolding on blogs such as this are part of this evolving consciousness) helps move us toward a one - world consciousness that is secure enough to tolerate diverse opinion and at the same time wise enough to recognize, and lovingly steer away from, that which is harmful to ourselves.

Thanks, Tracy, good point, although I think Lori's discussion of online forums and tweetups speaks to the issue you raise.

I realize that it's been many years since this discussion was in full swing, but I would like to point out that current thinking in health research is that energy levels follow good nutrition.

I think you can make valuable contributions to discussion, and you have brought up some good points.

ALISON BOAN: Well at this point I have registered for one of the small like for moms infant tubs but I think I am learning a lot from discussion here like the thought of the family bath and I had written down some questions beforehand about the frequency and all of that I had been thinking towards organic shampoo anything non-toxic.